Massachusetts's
highest court on Wednesday said it had no authority to
force lawmakers to vote on a proposed constitutional
amendment to ban same-sex marriage. Opponents of
same-sex marriage, angry that lawmakers failed to act
on the proposed amendment in November, had sued, asking the
court to clarify whether the state's constitution required
lawmakers to vote.
In its ruling the supreme judicial court wrote,
"Beyond resorting to aspirational language that relies
on the presumptive good faith of elected
representatives, there is no presently articulated judicial
remedy for the legislature's indifference to, or defiance
of, its constitutional duties." The same court had
ruled in 2003 that the state constitution guaranteed
gays the right to marry.
Opponents of same-sex marriage had collected
170,000 signatures to place an amendment on the 2008
ballot that would define marriage as a
union between a man and a woman, but their effort still
needed the support of a quarter of the legislature.
Lawmakers in November voted to recess rather than vote
on the question.
Same-sex marriage opponents, including Gov. Mitt
Romney, filed suit, arguing that the people's will was
being thwarted and that lawmakers were violating their
right to petition for a constitutional amendment. The
court said that drafters of the state provision that allows
for citizen petitions "did not intend a simple
majority of the joint session to have the power
effectively to block progress of an initiative."
A spokesman for Romney, who was on vacation, had
no immediate comment Wednesday. More than 8,000 gay
couples have been married since 2004 in Massachusetts,
the only state to allow same-sex marriage. Other states
offer similar rights but not the title of marriage to gay
couples: New Jersey joins Connecticut and Vermont in
February in offering civil unions, and California has
domestic partnerships. (Jay Lindsay, AP)
